"Reading is not exhausted merely by decoding the written word or written language, but rather anticipated by and extending into knowledge of the world." (Freire, 1983)
"Reading the world always procedes reading the word, and reading the word implies continually reading the world... reading the world is not preceded merely by reading the world, but by a certain form of writing it or rewriting it, that is, of transforming it by means of conscious, practical work." (Freire, 1987)
As I reflect on my collection of work that represents "reading the world," I see with clarity the importance of setting priorities and goals for personally defining literacy and the purposes for literacy learning. Another significant lesson learned this semester is that teaching should always take into account the differing levels of knowledge that children bring with them when they come to school.
Each student's background knowledge or prior experiences with reading the world is filtered through their cultural identity which in turn is linked to their sociological concept of class. I have learned that this initial reading of the world has been fashioned within the setting of each student's individual locality, and is strongly influenced by social origins.
The pieces I chose to represent my "reading the world" during this semester are:
Where I am Reading From/ Social Geographies (Poem/Website)
Literacy Event 1 and 2 with brief reflection (Chart/Reflection)
Literacy Analysis: Exploring Your Own Literacies Through a Ethnographic Lens(Paper)
Critical Reading: An Analysis of Pepsi Max Commercial(Wiki)
The map I created represents where I am reading from as does the following poem:
A Reflection about the event: My literacy event occurred at The Brooklyn Charter School, where I work as a literacy coach (K-5). I was doing a demonstration lesson in a fifth grade class in response to several teachers reporting their students struggling with “short responses.”
I shared this “literacy event” with about nine fifth grade students, their classroom teacher, and a consultant that was hired by the board of education to implement a whole school reform in response to the high number of students not meeting school benchmarks and failing the state tests.
The physical presence of the consultant and his reasons for observing this demonstration lesson brought in non-visible participants of this literacy event that included the administration and board members (since his observation would ultimately be reported to them.)
I have to wonder, if The Board of Education that hired the consultant read McDermott & Varenne’s article, “Culture as a Disability,” would they take into account that “In explanations of school failure, this account maintains that children from a minority cultural background mixed with teachers from a more dominant cultural background suffer enough miscommunication and alienation to give up on school?”
I believe this was the underlying issue impacting my literacy event. The majority of the school population is of low socio-economic status. Over 98% of the student population is black and the majority of teachers are from dominant cultures. In short, the teachers and students are coming from totally different
In summary, the event went like this: I was using the reading program, Treasures, by McGraw Hill to do a short response “re-teach.” The teacher’s manual called for me to guide the students as they completed a “story starter” about a boy who was experiencing skiing for the very first time. The excerpt that I read to the class from the chart left the boy at the top of the mountain with his skies pointing down the mountain. I then asked the class to “finish the story.”
Their faces were blank! I pondered two possible scenarios; 1. The class has never done an exercise like this before or 2. The class does not have the background knowledge to write a story about this topic.
In surveying the class, I came to see that only ONE out of the nine students had ever had any experience with skiing before. How could I ask them what would happen next to this boy when they did not possesses the background knowledge to know what could realistically happen next? I realized quickly that (at least in this situation) that the actually writing was not the issue causing students to not be able to complete the assignment. Moll, Amanti, Neff, & Gonzalez point out that, “teachers” rarely draw on the resources of the “funds of knowledge of the child’s world outside the context of the classroom.”
I think this is even more a problem when schools adopt a reading program from a large publishing company where there is even more of a disconnect between the students that will be learning from these materials and those creating them. Payne discusses differences among students who come from poverty, middle class, and wealthy backgrounds, and she makes recommendations about how teachers can better educate children from poverty. But… I am left wondering… how can massive publishing companies, the same companies responsible for making the state tests, provide students from underprivileged populations expect remotely similar results to children that are from like backgrounds to themselves.
A Reflection about the event:
While I was the only active participant in composing my literacy event, there were several non-visible constituents. In fact, the actual event lied more heavily on the non-visible constituents then it did on the visible.
Prior to sitting down to write the letter (that I am documenting as my second literacy event) I had to take into consideration several factors. First, I had to consider the views of the “non-visible” participants; Board Members, Head of School, Finance Department, etc… I think it is important to note that these “participants” come from a position of “power” resulting in both visible and non-visible implications. Careful consideration of meetings, discussions, and decisions these participants had prior to my letter all impacted what, and how I drafted my response.
Another important side note in my literacy event encompasses that of computer literacy. For me to comply with the request of The Head of School, I was asked to compose a “formal letter” including documentation of Graduate School transcripts and financial receipts. Not only did I need to know the basics… how to write an email and how to write a formal letter, I had to search the database of my Graduate School, find the appropriate documents, download them, and then compile them into a PDF to attach as an enclosure to my letter.
My analysis of this event is that while parts of this event seemed “natural” ie: composing an email, writing a letter, etc… Due to the non-visible participants position of “power” I found myself questioning each word I wrote. The time and detail I put into this “assignment” was also far greater then if I were asked to do a similar assignment by a colleague or friend.
What I take from this, and how I relate this to my profession, as a literacy specialist is such… Often “teachers” are viewed by students as one coming from a position of “power” similarly to the participants in my literacy event. I ask myself, to what degree is this appropriate? To what degree does this impact the work produced by students? Is there an alternative? How can we as professionals “level the playing field” so that the work our students produce is an authentic representation of their understandings of given materials?
Literacy Analysis: Exploring Your Own Literacies through an Ethnographic Lens At the beginning of this experience my definition of multiple literacies was slightly narrower then it is now. As I sit here and reflect on my two literacy experiences that I documented for the purpose of this assignment. I realize literacy consists of much more then the words on a page (or screen). The experience of unpacking these two events has provided me with new understandings that I am confident will impact future literacy experiences. My first literacy event occurred at the Brooklyn Charter School, where I am a Literacy Coach for grades K through 5. The majority of the student body is from a depressed socio-economic environment. Even though a large percentage of the student body is black or African American I have noticed that the professional staff is made of primarily white Caucasian females. In discussing schools of like circumstance with related difficulties, McDermott & Varenne maintain that children differing in cultural backgrounds other than its professional staff, more often than not, encounter significant miscommunication and even constructive alienation (McDermott & Varenne, 1995). My first literacy event was a demonstration lesson involving fifth grade students who were practicing writing short responses for upcoming state testing. The visible participants included the classroom teacher, a consultant (brought in to observe by the Board of Education in response to, and part of a whole school reform initiative), nine fifth-grade students, and myself. The scripted lesson I was directed to present came from McGraw Hill’s reading program entitled, Treasures, which had been recently adopted by the school administration. The Teacher’s Manual directed that I scaffold the students with a “story-starter” about a boy who was going skiing for the very first time. The excerpt that the text required me to read to the class started with a boy placed at the top of a mountain with his skies pointing down a steep hill. The students were then asked to finish the story using their own words. Time was not a factor in this lesson. I quickly noticed the student’s blank stares leading me to two possible conclusions; (1), the class has never done an exercise like this before; or (2), the class did not have sufficient background knowledge about skiing. After an impromptu survey, I came to realize that only one of the nine students had ever skied before. It seemed obvious at that point that it was going to be difficult for students to write about a topic that they knew little about. Moll, Amanti, Neff, & Gonzalez point out that teachers rarely draw upon the resources of the “funds of knowledge of the child’s world outside the context of the classroom” (Moll, Amanti, Neff, & Gonzalez, 1992). Reading this quote more then twenty years after it was written shows me that we have not come that far. The fact that my students had very little knowledge of skiing because they are from an urban school demonstrates that those who write tests do not take into consideration where all learners are reading from. It is just adding another even more needless layer to test prep. One big conclusion that can be made from this first literacy event is how problematic adopting a reading program from a large publishing company can be for students; in particular, students from such backgrounds. Programs such as these, possibly unintentionally, deprive classroom teachers the ability to observe and then integrate their students respective “funds of knowledge.” This event leaves concern for the continued manner in which publishing companies undertake responsibility for creating standardized tests. For my second literacy event I wanted to put myself in a similar position that my students had been in for my first event. One that reflected a certain type of imposed power and positioning. While I was the only active participant in composing my second literacy event, there were several non-visible participants. In addition to myself the event included the head of Brooklyn Charter School, all active Board Members, and any possible unknown participants who would have been in attendance. The actual event relied heavily on the power of the non-visible participants. The Head of School where I work asked that I compose a formal letter including documentation of classes I completed at Columbia University as well as corresponding financial receipts. Prior to composing this letter I had to take it to consideration several critical factors. First I had to consider the views of the non-invisible participants; Board members, Head of School, Finance Department, etc. It is important to note that these participants represent positions of authority and power. Careful consideration of meetings, discussions, and decision-making processes by these participants further influenced how I would draft my letter. Knowing what I knew about the non-visible participants who in this event hold positions of authority, I found myself questioning every word that I wrote. I had to access everything relative that I knew and approach writing this letter through a critical lens. There were a number of other non-visible participants in this literacy event including my teachers that taught me how to write, my parents who support my acquisition of the English language, and the many people who have written letters that I have received that now impact my understanding of how a professional letter is structured. In addition I also needed to know how to access and download these documents required from various databases and websites, which have a language all their own. This points out that there needed to be certain level of computer literacy as well. Parts of this literacy event I initially would have taken for granted as coming naturally. For example, knowing what a salutation is, a necessary understanding for composing a letter. Now I realize that all these skills are the product of prior literacy experiences. Through this literacy event I realize now that the way I viewed the non-active participants, who held positions of power, may also be the way my students view me, ultimately impacting their literacy events. I was left wondering to what degree can this be overcome? To what degree does this impact the work produced by students? Is there an alternative? How can we, as professionals level the playing field so that the work our students produce is an authentic representation for their understandings of given materials? I further recognize that linear development in literacy skills is simply not a given. Each student develops differently and is often dependent upon internal and external factors. Scribner reminds us that while literacy is a problem of pressing national concern, we have yet to discover or set its boundaries (Scribner, 1984). I found this to be true in both my literacy events. From the student’s lack of background knowledge, reminding me how poverty and privilege play such a significant role in literacy acquisition, to my own personal experience where power, culture, and identity were all interconnected. This left me with a more succinct definition of literacy. Through the analysis of these two literacy events, I am convinced that the meaning of “multiple literacies” operating in cross cultural and socio-economic economies can be achieved. While I recognized that literacies nourish each other, I did not recognize the significance of “unpacking” such literacies to further such growth.
Critical Reading: An Analysis of Pepsi MaxCommercialLink
For my second Critical Reading Paper I chose to analyze a commercial. I wanted to step away from strictly looking at literacy events that centered around children. This experience game me the opportunity to focus on an literacy event that targeted my age demographic.
It should be noted that this commercial aired during the 2011 Superbowl. Theadvertisement was part of the Doritos and Pepsi Max "Crash the Super Bowl Contest." Prior to this year Budweiser took the winnings. The Pepsi commercial "Love Hurts," ranked #5 during this year's Superbowl. The commercial was created by Brad Bosley a white 28 year-old from male from Los Angeles, California. The aspiring writer and director made the commercial with a measly budget of $800. The airtime however for these coveted advertisements are often the highest priced of the year. Fox estimated the cost for a brief thirty second slot of airtime can run up to three million dollars! Why? These commercials are playing for audiences of one hundred million people plus. Just think of the impact a commercial reaching that many viewers can have.
As I examine this commercial though a critical lens I intend to unpack who was marginalized through this advertisement as well as explore further the effects of power, culture, and race. Jones notes that an imperative part of engaging in critical literacies is to have the ability to read from multiple perspectives (Jones, 2006). One step I took as a part of my analysis was to create a list of my "cultural locations," and re-examine the commercial multiple times through a different lens. During this process I asked myself did I read this commercial differently as a female, as a single? I found was that this was very useful in the unpacking process.
Reading the World
"Reading is not exhausted merely by decoding the written word or written language, but rather anticipated by and extending into knowledge of the world." (Freire, 1983)
"Reading the world always procedes reading the word, and reading the word implies continually reading the world... reading the world is not preceded merely by reading the world, but by a certain form of writing it or rewriting it, that is, of transforming it by means of conscious, practical work." (Freire, 1987)
As I reflect on my collection of work that represents "reading the world," I see with clarity the importance of setting priorities and goals for personally defining literacy and the purposes for literacy learning. Another significant lesson learned this semester is that teaching should always take into account the differing levels of knowledge that children bring with them when they come to school.
Each student's background knowledge or prior experiences with reading the world is filtered through their cultural identity which in turn is linked to their sociological concept of class. I have learned that this initial reading of the world has been fashioned within the setting of each student's individual locality, and is strongly influenced by social origins.
The pieces I chose to represent my "reading the world" during this semester are:
My Social Geographies:Map Site
The map I created represents where I am reading from as does the following poem:
A Reflection about the event:
My literacy event occurred at The Brooklyn Charter School, where I work as a literacy coach (K-5). I was doing a demonstration lesson in a fifth grade class in response to several teachers reporting their students struggling with “short responses.”
I shared this “literacy event” with about nine fifth grade students, their classroom teacher, and a consultant that was hired by the board of education to implement a whole school reform in response to the high number of students not meeting school benchmarks and failing the state tests.
The physical presence of the consultant and his reasons for observing this demonstration lesson brought in non-visible participants of this literacy event that included the administration and board members (since his observation would ultimately be reported to them.)
I have to wonder, if The Board of Education that hired the consultant read McDermott & Varenne’s article, “Culture as a Disability,” would they take into account that “In explanations of school failure, this account maintains that children from a minority cultural background mixed with teachers from a more dominant cultural background suffer enough miscommunication and alienation to give up on school?”
I believe this was the underlying issue impacting my literacy event. The majority of the school population is of low socio-economic status. Over 98% of the student population is black and the majority of teachers are from dominant cultures. In short, the teachers and students are coming from totally different
In summary, the event went like this: I was using the reading program, Treasures, by McGraw Hill to do a short response “re-teach.” The teacher’s manual called for me to guide the students as they completed a “story starter” about a boy who was experiencing skiing for the very first time. The excerpt that I read to the class from the chart left the boy at the top of the mountain with his skies pointing down the mountain. I then asked the class to “finish the story.”
Their faces were blank! I pondered two possible scenarios; 1. The class has never done an exercise like this before or 2. The class does not have the background knowledge to write a story about this topic.
In surveying the class, I came to see that only ONE out of the nine students had ever had any experience with skiing before. How could I ask them what would happen next to this boy when they did not possesses the background knowledge to know what could realistically happen next? I realized quickly that (at least in this situation) that the actually writing was not the issue causing students to not be able to complete the assignment. Moll, Amanti, Neff, & Gonzalez point out that, “teachers” rarely draw on the resources of the “funds of knowledge of the child’s world outside the context of the classroom.”
I think this is even more a problem when schools adopt a reading program from a large publishing company where there is even more of a disconnect between the students that will be learning from these materials and those creating them. Payne discusses differences among students who come from poverty, middle class, and wealthy backgrounds, and she makes recommendations about how teachers can better educate children from poverty. But… I am left wondering… how can massive publishing companies, the same companies responsible for making the state tests, provide students from underprivileged populations expect remotely similar results to children that are from like backgrounds to themselves.
A Reflection about the event:
While I was the only active participant in composing my literacy event, there were several non-visible constituents. In fact, the actual event lied more heavily on the non-visible constituents then it did on the visible.
Prior to sitting down to write the letter (that I am documenting as my second literacy event) I had to take into consideration several factors. First, I had to consider the views of the “non-visible” participants; Board Members, Head of School, Finance Department, etc… I think it is important to note that these “participants” come from a position of “power” resulting in both visible and non-visible implications. Careful consideration of meetings, discussions, and decisions these participants had prior to my letter all impacted what, and how I drafted my response.
Another important side note in my literacy event encompasses that of computer literacy. For me to comply with the request of The Head of School, I was asked to compose a “formal letter” including documentation of Graduate School transcripts and financial receipts. Not only did I need to know the basics… how to write an email and how to write a formal letter, I had to search the database of my Graduate School, find the appropriate documents, download them, and then compile them into a PDF to attach as an enclosure to my letter.
My analysis of this event is that while parts of this event seemed “natural” ie: composing an email, writing a letter, etc… Due to the non-visible participants position of “power” I found myself questioning each word I wrote. The time and detail I put into this “assignment” was also far greater then if I were asked to do a similar assignment by a colleague or friend.
What I take from this, and how I relate this to my profession, as a literacy specialist is such… Often “teachers” are viewed by students as one coming from a position of “power” similarly to the participants in my literacy event. I ask myself, to what degree is this appropriate? To what degree does this impact the work produced by students? Is there an alternative? How can we as professionals “level the playing field” so that the work our students produce is an authentic representation of their understandings of given materials?
Literacy Analysis:
Exploring Your Own Literacies through an Ethnographic Lens
At the beginning of this experience my definition of multiple literacies was slightly narrower then it is now. As I sit here and reflect on my two literacy experiences that I documented for the purpose of this assignment. I realize literacy consists of much more then the words on a page (or screen). The experience of unpacking these two events has provided me with new understandings that I am confident will impact future literacy experiences.
My first literacy event occurred at the Brooklyn Charter School, where I am a Literacy Coach for grades K through 5. The majority of the student body is from a depressed socio-economic environment. Even though a large percentage of the student body is black or African American I have noticed that the professional staff is made of primarily white Caucasian females. In discussing schools of like circumstance with related difficulties, McDermott & Varenne maintain that children differing in cultural backgrounds other than its professional staff, more often than not, encounter significant miscommunication and even constructive alienation (McDermott & Varenne, 1995).
My first literacy event was a demonstration lesson involving fifth grade students who were practicing writing short responses for upcoming state testing. The visible participants included the classroom teacher, a consultant (brought in to observe by the Board of Education in response to, and part of a whole school reform initiative), nine fifth-grade students, and myself.
The scripted lesson I was directed to present came from McGraw Hill’s reading program entitled, Treasures, which had been recently adopted by the school administration. The Teacher’s Manual directed that I scaffold the students with a “story-starter” about a boy who was going skiing for the very first time. The excerpt that the text required me to read to the class started with a boy placed at the top of a mountain with his skies pointing down a steep hill. The students were then asked to finish the story using their own words. Time was not a factor in this lesson.
I quickly noticed the student’s blank stares leading me to two possible conclusions; (1), the class has never done an exercise like this before; or (2), the class did not have sufficient background knowledge about skiing. After an impromptu survey, I came to realize that only one of the nine students had ever skied before. It seemed obvious at that point that it was going to be difficult for students to write about a topic that they knew little about.
Moll, Amanti, Neff, & Gonzalez point out that teachers rarely draw upon the resources of the “funds of knowledge of the child’s world outside the context of the classroom” (Moll, Amanti, Neff, & Gonzalez, 1992). Reading this quote more then twenty years after it was written shows me that we have not come that far. The fact that my students had very little knowledge of skiing because they are from an urban school demonstrates that those who write tests do not take into consideration where all learners are reading from. It is just adding another even more needless layer to test prep.
One big conclusion that can be made from this first literacy event is how problematic adopting a reading program from a large publishing company can be for students; in particular, students from such backgrounds. Programs such as these, possibly unintentionally, deprive classroom teachers the ability to observe and then integrate their students respective “funds of knowledge.” This event leaves concern for the continued manner in which publishing companies undertake responsibility for creating standardized tests.
For my second literacy event I wanted to put myself in a similar position that my students had been in for my first event. One that reflected a certain type of imposed power and positioning. While I was the only active participant in composing my second literacy event, there were several non-visible participants. In addition to myself the event included the head of Brooklyn Charter School, all active Board Members, and any possible unknown participants who would have been in attendance. The actual event relied heavily on the power of the non-visible participants.
The Head of School where I work asked that I compose a formal letter including documentation of classes I completed at Columbia University as well as corresponding financial receipts. Prior to composing this letter I had to take it to consideration several critical factors. First I had to consider the views of the non-invisible participants; Board members, Head of School, Finance Department, etc. It is important to note that these participants represent positions of authority and power. Careful consideration of meetings, discussions, and decision-making processes by these participants further influenced how I would draft my letter. Knowing what I knew about the non-visible participants who in this event hold positions of authority, I found myself questioning every word that I wrote. I had to access everything relative that I knew and approach writing this letter through a critical lens.
There were a number of other non-visible participants in this literacy event including my teachers that taught me how to write, my parents who support my acquisition of the English language, and the many people who have written letters that I have received that now impact my understanding of how a professional letter is structured. In addition I also needed to know how to access and download these documents required from various databases and websites, which have a language all their own. This points out that there needed to be certain level of computer literacy as well.
Parts of this literacy event I initially would have taken for granted as coming naturally. For example, knowing what a salutation is, a necessary understanding for composing a letter. Now I realize that all these skills are the product of prior literacy experiences.
Through this literacy event I realize now that the way I viewed the non-active participants, who held positions of power, may also be the way my students view me, ultimately impacting their literacy events. I was left wondering to what degree can this be overcome? To what degree does this impact the work produced by students? Is there an alternative? How can we, as professionals level the playing field so that the work our students produce is an authentic representation for their understandings of given materials?
I further recognize that linear development in literacy skills is simply not a given. Each student develops differently and is often dependent upon internal and external factors.
Scribner reminds us that while literacy is a problem of pressing national concern, we have yet to discover or set its boundaries (Scribner, 1984). I found this to be true in both my literacy events. From the student’s lack of background knowledge, reminding me how poverty and privilege play such a significant role in literacy acquisition, to my own personal experience where power, culture, and identity were all interconnected. This left me with a more succinct definition of literacy.
Through the analysis of these two literacy events, I am convinced that the meaning of “multiple literacies” operating in cross cultural and socio-economic economies can be achieved. While I recognized that literacies nourish each other, I did not recognize the significance of “unpacking” such literacies to further such growth.
Critical Reading: An Analysis of Pepsi Max CommercialLink
For my second Critical Reading Paper I chose to analyze a commercial. I wanted to step away from strictly looking at literacy events that centered around children. This experience game me the opportunity to focus on an literacy event that targeted my age demographic.
It should be noted that this commercial aired during the 2011 Superbowl. The advertisement was part of the Doritos and Pepsi Max "Crash the Super Bowl Contest." Prior to this year Budweiser took the winnings. The Pepsi commercial "Love Hurts," ranked #5 during this year's Superbowl. The commercial was created by Brad Bosley a white 28 year-old from male from Los Angeles, California. The aspiring writer and director made the commercial with a measly budget of $800. The airtime however for these coveted advertisements are often the highest priced of the year. Fox estimated the cost for a brief thirty second slot of airtime can run up to three million dollars! Why? These commercials are playing for audiences of one hundred million people plus. Just think of the impact a commercial reaching that many viewers can have.
As I examine this commercial though a critical lens I intend to unpack who was marginalized through this advertisement as well as explore further the effects of power, culture, and race. Jones notes that an imperative part of engaging in critical literacies is to have the ability to read from multiple perspectives (Jones, 2006). One step I took as a part of my analysis was to create a list of my "cultural locations," and re-examine the commercial multiple times through a different lens. During this process I asked myself did I read this commercial differently as a female, as a single? I found was that this was very useful in the unpacking process.